I'm dyin' here.

by TP43 on Jul 5, 2007 2:10 PM PDT

Am I the only one feeling like it's the night before Christmas? They said a week to ten days to sort out the backend of whatever it is they did on draft night, so of course in my mind that's today.

Anybody heard anything new or is it still just Jones? (Canzano doesn't count) Has anybody gotten any clarification on the "prominent" portion of the comments? Was that really what was said or was it a slip of the tongue and it's just Jones?

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I'm listening to the Quick chat

And he also says it's just Jones and Rudy. I guess those guys became available somehow as part of the NY trade, and that perhaps one or the other isn't official until the NY trade clears. Not the news I wanted.

by shralpster on Jul 5, 2007 2:18 PM PDT reply actions

But I thought James Jones was . . .

. . . going to be the recipient of the $3mil trade exception we got in the Knicks deal?

If Rudy Fernandez is going to be cashed in for Jamestown Jonestown,
then we'd still be sitting on (or doing something else with) that trade exception.
In which case, why did we bother getting it, and on draft day in particular?

And you all know dang well that [trade exception + Rudy]
DOES NOT EQUAL James Jones--with our overflowing roster,
that is NOT a deal Pritchard would do.

Something's up for ten-days-after-the-draft action, and it's NOT JUST James Jones.

Blazers have a five-on-three...and they pull it back and wait for help.

by QualityPie on Jul 5, 2007 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions

Not losing Fernandez, GETTING Fernandez

Fernandez is not being traded to Phoenix as part of this deal; rather, it is as part of this deal that we got him from Phoenix. Technically, the trade to get Fernandez has not gone through, because it is part of a package with taking James Jones, which cannot happen until the trade exception from the Zach deal is ready.

Basically, the trade with Phoenix was $3 million for Fernandez, plus taking Jones off of their hands for them.

by pualo on Jul 5, 2007 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions

good clarification

Thanks.
What's made it confusing, I think, is that the draft-night announcement said the Blazer bought the #24 outright; then came word of a second deal with PHX for James Jones.
If, as you indicate, it really was a single trade, that would explain why Pritchard wouldn't talk about Fernandez in press conference Q&A sessions other than to indicate that the NY deal had to be finalized first.

by hugs on Jul 5, 2007 10:09 PM PDT up reply actions

sounds like its jones

I doubt it will be anything spectacular, probably just the addition of James Jones.

by myemic23 on Jul 5, 2007 2:19 PM PDT reply actions

I'm still wondering why

Pritchard hyped the whole thing. If he had just not said anything it would've been fine but the way he hinted at something big just created unrealistic expectations.

Maybe James Jones is about to have a monster year or something, I don't know.

by jayseyfield on Jul 5, 2007 2:21 PM PDT reply actions

The whole Jones thing leaked out late on draft day

All of Pritchard's anxious wait-for-the-follow-up comments came well after
we all heard about the trade exception for Jamestown Jonestown.

He seemed pointedly trying to reassure us that there was more coming,
and NOT JUST acquiring Jamestown Jonestown.

(Can't get enough of that nickname. So what if I just made it up?)

Blazers have a five-on-three...and they pull it back and wait for help.

by QualityPie on Jul 5, 2007 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions

I think he was just freaking excited

that he got rid of Randolph.

by bfan on Jul 5, 2007 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions

Mandatory ten days.

That's the time that must occur between someone getting acquired (draft OR trade)
and then getting traded or re-traded (with the notable exception,
as someone here explained, of anyone in a package deal
then getting re-traded in ANOTHER package deal--that has to wait, like, weeks,
and that kills any 10-day-postponed trades involving Channing Frye.)

Point being, except for Channing Frye as part of a trade package, any trades involving
someone (or someTHING, in the case of the $3mil trade exception
we got in the Knicks deal that will be used on James Jones) acquired on draft day
(List: That trade exception; Rudy Fernandez; Taurean Green; Josh McRoberts)
can be part of a trade package on Sunday, July 8--AND NOT A DAY EARLIER!

The James Jones acquisition can't happen until then, but even aside from that,
the hints from Pritchard of the backend you're talking about
seem voracious and anticipatory enough, and happening after the Jones thing was revealed,
that, yeah: I get the feeling there's something big waiting to happen
involving a draft-day acquisition which must wait until Sunday.

Heck, even Pritchard seems nervous with anticipation over the follow-up deal.

Sunday, my man--Sunday.

(Unless Sunday counts as the TENTH day following the draft-day deals,
in which case the next step has to wait for Monday at the very latest.)

Blazers have a five-on-three...and they pull it back and wait for help.

by QualityPie on Jul 5, 2007 2:24 PM PDT reply actions

That's right

KP said 7 but Penn corrected it to be 10; didn't he? I think that's the way it went. This is killing me. . .

One good tidbit, Jones contract does expire in 2 years even if he picks up his option for 08-09 so maybe his piece is short term tryout but ultimately cap space as well (2.9m + 3.1m).

In Kevin Pritchard we trust.

by TP43 on Jul 5, 2007 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions

There is something else coming.

It's not like they are going to run out and tell Quick what they are doing...

by Blazerholic on Jul 5, 2007 4:21 PM PDT reply actions

Strange coincidence

I'm sure it means absolutely nothing but Diaw and Darius have exactly the same contract starting next year.

07-08 08-09 09-10
Miles 8.25m 9m 9m
Diaw 9m 9m 9m

(anybody know how to get those columns to line up?)

What would people think of Diaw? He strikes me as sort of the ultimate facilitator / utility guy. Does a little bit of everything and his role was reduced this past year so maybe he's available? Part of his reduced role probably had to do with getting fat (literally) and happy but still an interesting talent at the 3.

In Kevin Pritchard we trust.

by TP43 on Jul 5, 2007 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions

ol' Boris

Is intriguing, but it's my 2 cents that the Suns/Nash make him look better than he is. He's versatile, but usually the small forward on a three point shooting team that can't make any threes. Good ball handler and passer though.

by morescrillaigots on Jul 5, 2007 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions

Household name?

Didn't KP promise us a household name? I've never heard of this James Jones guy until this trade talk came about and I follow the NBA. Okay Blazers mostly but still Household name means someone most folks know of. Am I wrong? Someone please s'plain it to me.

Sunday/Monday seems very far away.

I love women and basketball... but not women's basketball.

by T REX on Jul 5, 2007 5:17 PM PDT reply actions

James Jones is a household name

Well, at least in the Jones' house. Seems like half the people are waiting for our 'household name' and it can't be James Jones, the guy gets confused with Jumaine Jones.

by morescrillaigots on Jul 5, 2007 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions

Here's a guess: Steve Blake

Maybe what Pritchard meant was that trading away Dickau opens up a spot for Steve Blake? Steve Blake is an acclaimed player, isn't he? He's also someone that "we feel very good about".

Just a thought... and the flaw with it is that I don't know why we wouldn't have heard of the Blake signing yet.

For what it's worth, the Oregonlive guys concluded that the acclaimed player was Rudy Fernandez.

by PoliSam on Jul 5, 2007 11:46 PM PDT up reply actions

KP said "acclaimed small forward"

Remember, KP specifically said the acclaimed player was a small forward. Thus, not James Jones. Yes, he's a small forward, no he isn't acclaimed as anything more than a decent backup.

And Fernandez is definately not a small forward; he's acclaimed but he is a smallish shooting guard (smallish frame wise; he's got height for the position).

I do not know what is developing, but the way KP said it (and re-said it on the radio n' stuff) makes it seem that it isn't "just" James Jones, AND it involves another small forward. An "acclaimed" one at that!

I understand he can't talk about James Jones and Fernandez until the no-trade period is over, but he seemed to refer to something bigger. Oregonlive dismissed it, but they were incorrect in the words they said KP used.

In my opinion.

I can't imagine who'd it be, however. PHX would probably like to get rid of Diaw's contract, but I agree that he looks better in that system than he would elsewhere. BUT he would give us a THIRD ball handler, a great passer, and a guy who looks to set people up over his own shot. He can also play 4 positions (all but SG).

My concern about him is that he really did get fat after getting his big contract... and not just that he got fat, but how QUICKLY he got fat is what scares me. He played for France allll summer after getting all the way to the Western Conference finals with PHX. He didn't have much time off at all before training camp, and he still came in FAT. Not out of shape, but FAT.

That takes skill. Maybe not a skill we want.

But aside from that, a pass-first point-forward who can hit the open shot would be pretty nice. Jeff Green-ish, perhaps?

Mortimer

by Mortimer on Jul 6, 2007 3:38 AM PDT reply actions

Interesting

I did not hear the interview where he said it was an acclaimed small forward. That's interesting. The interview I heard was the one where he clearly referred to three players. He said the Randolph gave them, in addition to what was already announced, "a pick and a player and also, uh, uh, uh, a highly acclaimed player that we feel very good about."

On Oregonlive they concluded that he just misspoke and that the highly acclaimed player was Fernandez. If there is a third player, my guess is that he's not on the Phoenix roster, but will somehow involve one of the pieces of the Randolph trade... Also, if you look at the Blazers roster, they really do need a quicker SF that can defend quicker SF as well as play some SG in case of an injury to Webster or Roy.

by PoliSam on Jul 6, 2007 7:52 AM PDT up reply actions